Updates from Stephen R. Bradd RSS Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Stephen R. Bradd 6:41 pm on May 19, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Letter to the Editor – Weinberg’s Myths 

    [SRB here: If you have any suggestions for improvement, please share them. I'll submit this Monday. Thanks.]

    Dr. Harold Weinberg addressed three alleged Biblical myths pertaining to the global flood in his article from May 18, 2012. I’m confident that Weinberg is an intelligent man, but he has not shown himself to be much of a Bible scholar to date. His introduction offered one definition of “myth,” but I’d like to provide another from dictionary.com: A myth is “an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.” His recent article contains a strong imaginary or fictitious component; namely, that the Bible contradicts itself! Allow me to explain.

    First, Weinberg attacks what he claims to be a contradiction about the number of animals brought on the ark. A careful reading of Genesis 6:19 says “bring two”; it does not say “bring only two,” which is what Weinberg would need to prove a contradiction with Genesis 7:2,3. Noah did bring two of each sort of animal into the ark, and of the clean animals he brought even more so that some could be sacrificed later without causing extinction. The only “myth” here is the careless Biblical interpretation grounded in the fictitious Documentary Hypothesis to which Weinberg evidently subscribes. The Bible has not been edited, let alone by imaginary redactors like J, E, P, D, or any other letter of the alphabet! Jesus taught that Moses wrote the Pentateuch; that’s good enough for me.

    Weinberg questions why the animals even needed to be saved from the deluge since God could simply have created more. I’m not in a position to question why God did or did not do certain things—and neither is Weinberg. I’m content to take God at His word, however, knowing that His ways and thoughts are far above my own (Isa. 55:8,9) and that there are some things He has not chosen to reveal to humanity (Deut. 29:29).

    Second, Weinberg is confused about how long it rained during the global flood. Initially, it rained continuously for 40 days (Gen. 7:4,12). But, the rain that fell from above was not the only source of the rising flood waters. Water also came from below (i.e., the fountains of the deep were broken up). I don’t find anything contradictory about stating that it rained for 40 days straight but the water levels may have increased for 150 days total; that is, until the fountains of the deep were stopped and any further intermittent rain ceased temporarily (Gen. 8:2). Certainly more detailed information is desired, but there is no contradiction or myth here. The interested reader is encouraged to read my other comments pertaining to the flood at: http://www.Flood.AudioEvangelism.com.

    Third, Weinberg is mistaken about the depth of the flood waters. Genesis 7:20 does not state that the flood waters had a total depth of 15 cubits but that “the waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward” (in other words, the water covered or “prevailed” over everything by at least 15 cubits of water). Some balk at this view because of the amount of water that would be required to cover Mt. Everest, for example. This problem is easily dismissed, however, when one realizes that the global flood itself radically changed Earth from what was likely a single continent tropical paradise into what remains today—seven continents and a much harsher environment. The tectonic activity related to the flood could have produced our modern mountain ranges. There is no proof that there were tall mountains prior to the global flood.

    On a closing note, it is interesting to observe that every ancient culture has a flood story of some sort (e.g., Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Hittites, Chinese, etc.). Surely this lends credibility to the factualness of the global flood. As always, I would enjoy discussing these matters in more detail with any interested party.

    • Stephen R. Bradd, Clinton Church of Christ
     
    • Eugene Adkins 7:37 pm on May 19, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Hang in there in brother. I appreciate your willingness to discuss things like this. I had a conversation with another guy on his blog about a month ago about this very topic.

      It’s a strange doctrine, but to me it’s nothing more than simple a cop-out that placates and encourages Christians to place more faith in the “text book” of science than in the word of God. One guy who joined the discussion went on to write another post where he proceeded to say that I suffered from “cognitive dissonance” because I said I’ll stick with Jesus in my stance concerning the flood of Genesis and it being a fact and not a myth. What other reason needs to be given?

      Here’s the link – http://rogerdhansen.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/genesis-1-3-as-myth/

      Read it if you like. You might get something from it…you might not :) Either way, good reply that you’re submitting, Stephen. BTW – Keep up the great work with AE.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 8:18 pm on May 19, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Hey Eugene. Thanks for the post. I read the linked discussion. As I read the other men’s comments, I thought of how I would reply. Then I would read your reply below their words and it was pretty much what I was thinking. :) Good job, brother.

        I’ll stick with Eugene as he sticks with Jesus (cf. I Cor. 11:1).

    • Ron Thomas 4:59 am on May 20, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, It reads well and you adequately, but politely, dismissed the “Dr’s” alleged contradiction.s Nothing for me to add; you did a good job!

  • Stephen R. Bradd 1:18 pm on May 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    An analogy regarding Jesus as the only way to salvation 

    It’s flawed, like most analogies, if pressed too far, but I found this to be worth 3 minutes of my time–

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 4:59 pm on May 6, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    AudioEvangelism.com Facebook Page 

    We’ve finally got this going and daily lessons are being posted there for any to easily share with their FB friends. Please “like” us, if you will.

    http://www.facebook.com/AudioEvangelism

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 8:49 am on April 23, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Honeymooners 

    You may have heard about a new bride who was a bit
    embarrassed to be known as a honeymooner.

    So when she and her husband pulled up to the hotel, she
    asked him if there was any way that they could make it
    appear that they had been married a long time.

    He responded, “Sure. You carry the suitcases!”

    :)

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 2:51 pm on April 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: public confession of sin   

    Public Confession of Sin 

    Thought this was a good read & worthwhile, though perhaps controversial toward the end. What are your thoughts?

    http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswers/2010/01-16.html

     
    • Eugene Adkins 4:28 pm on April 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Hey Stephen,

      I believe a public confession of sin should be treated with love and patience. To me it’s obvious, unless the person is being deceptive, that the person’s heart is open to God if they desire to “make things right” with their confession. I’ve made mention before to public assemblies that I greatly admire those who come forward to confess their sin. It takes humility and courage – two things we don’t always show when it comes to confession and sin.

      Often times it seems like we have no problem admitting that we sinned before we were baptized, but afterwards we’re afraid to admit it again. I believe we would all be “going forward” a lot more if we held ourselves to the same standard that we can hold others to in our mind.

      “He who keeps a sin covered is looking for love; but he who keeps on talking of a thing makes division between friends.” (Proverbs 17:9)

    • Russ McCullough 10:31 pm on April 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      The proverbial “too much information” applies here. Confession should never be voyeuristic.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 10:04 am on April 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: lent,   

    What the Bible teaches about Lent [letter to the editor] 

    [any suggestions/corrections are welcome; I'll be submitting this later today -SRB]

    Dr. Weinberg addressed the subject of Lent in his column from April 13, 2012. I learned some things from his article and wanted to comment on a couple points that really caught my attention in his piece.

    First, I noticed that Weinberg didn’t refer to a single Bible verse about Lent. He didn’t cite any commands from God regarding Lent or any exhortation from an apostle. Of course, one cannot blame Weinberg for this—the Bible is silent about Lent! That’s right, Lent is not mentioned in Scripture. Some may not be troubled by this fact, but this is a significant matter, however, for a true Bible believer (i.e., one who looks to the Scriptures for his authority and not man-made traditions that have evolved over centuries). All Scripture is given by God, and God has given us everything we need to be equipped to live righteous lives for Him (II Tim. 3:16,17; II Pet. 1:3). Furthermore, Jesus promised that the apostles would be guided into all the truth (John 16:13). I believe they were guided into all the truth and wrote down everything we need today religiously. Yet, they were silent about Lent and there is no evidence the apostles observed Lent. If the apostles didn’t observe Lent, why should anyone today do so? Paul stated a concern of his in Galatians 4:10,11 that is applicable here – “You observe days and months and seasons and years [in a religious sense, -SRB]. I am afraid for you, lest I have labored in vain.”

    Second, I must disagree with one comment Weinberg affirmed: “Since the earliest times of the Church, there is evidence of some kind of Lenten preparation for Easter.” The Bible records that Jesus’ church came into existence in Acts 2 (note 2:47), which was approximately AD 30. There is no record of anyone keeping Lent until the second century. So, for about 100 years or more, no Christian observed Lent. The apostles certainly never did. Since several generation of Christians did not observe Lent, it is not the case that Lent has been observed “since the earliest times of the Church.” Lent is a man-made religious tradition.

    Lest I be misunderstood, I am certainly not against an individual choosing to fast or examine his or her spiritual life in order to make changes for the better (Matt. 6:18; II Cor. 13:5). The problem comes when such is regulated and even mandated. To do such is wrong because it adds to God’s word (Rev. 22:18,19). If God wanted us to observe Lent, He would have instructed the apostles (who were guided into all truth) about the matter in the first century. Jesus warned about the error of vain worship. When one teaches “as doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9), vain worship is the result. It would be my pleasure to discuss these matters in more detail with any interested party.
    -Stephen R. Bradd, Clinton Church of Christ

     
    • Ron Thomas 10:41 am on April 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I would remove the subjectivity quality of this remark, Stephen. “I believe they were guided into all the truth and wrote down everything we need today religiously.” Apart from that it is very good. Good job; keep it up, brother.

    • Eugene Adkins 4:54 pm on April 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      He said, ““Since the earliest times of the Church, there is evidence of some kind of Lenten preparation for Easter.””

      I suppose the very evidence he speaks of would probably come from the very same evidence that the church observed Easter.

      By the way, Stephen, it’s a little off topic, but I wanted to tell you that the charts/graphs that have been in the last few AE emails have been great!

      • Stephen R. Bradd 8:22 pm on April 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Thanks brother. I made those charts 10+ years ago on Word 97. I should update the look since I’ve learned a lot about graphics since then (content is still good, of course). :)

        • Eugene Adkins 8:28 pm on April 17, 2012 Permalink

          I really liked the one on the inspiration of the scriptures. I think I may make a bulletin board out of it. Keep up the great work. Hope all is well with the baby-on-the-way and your wife.

    • Russ McCullough 4:58 pm on April 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      According to medieval church historians Leo, Socrates and Jerome, “Lent” was not known or practiced until the middle of the 5th century. The Magisterium teaches that people should observe “Lent” but the Scripture does not. We should cite the Patristics for history but never for theology.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 8:25 pm on April 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Well, I don’t doubt what you are affirming Russ. Weinberg seemed to state that Lent (in its basic form was practiced in the 2nd century–though not formalized until Nicea). Regardless, he admitted it wasn’t until the 2nd century which negates the notion of it being around from the beginning of the church–which was the point I wanted to stress for the public.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 10:15 pm on April 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,   

    Where is instrumental music authorized? 

    I have a friend whose dad has become a practicing Jew in recent years. He is now essentially a song leader in synagogue. The dad mentioned that the Jews do not use instrumental music in synagogue because it was only authorized by God for TEMPLE use.

    I found this interesting. I know (per 2 Chron 29:25) that the Israelites were authorized to use mechanical instruments under the Mosaic regime, but I had never thought much about the LOCATION of such use. Not just anywhere, evidently–ONLY the temple (that is, only where God dwells).

    If this is correct (and if you can think of counter examples, please share them), then it would suggest something intriguing for Eph 5:19 & 1 Cor 6:19,20. Today, God dwells in us (Christians). And, thus one could reason that God has STILL authorized “instrumental music” today in His “temple” in the sense that we are to make melody to the Lord IN OUR HEARTS (i.e., His dwelling place)!

    I don’t know if this is of any value, but it was a “new thought” for me at least. Feel free to help me ascertain if it is correct or not! :)

     
    • Russ McCullough 10:45 pm on April 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      You are dead on. The instrument was always associated with the act of animal sacrifice at the tabernacle / temple. Since Christ was the perfect sacrifice, once and for all….no more sacrifice…not more instrumental music. The synagogue model was endorsed and embraced by Christ Himself and served as a worship model in the NT. That model (pattern) is still in effect today. In reality, the addition of the instrument today calls into question the finality of Christ’s sacrifice. Pretty scary….

    • Terry 10:48 pm on April 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I’m not advocating instrumental music, but to answer your question, in 2 Samuel 6, specifically verse 5, the ark was being brought up to Jerusalem; the procession was accompanied by cymbals, harps, castanets, etc. even though it is not yet installed in the temple. (It’s probably worth noting the ark was being conveyed in a way that was not authorized by God; however, God doesn’t condemn the music, only the manner in which Uzzah reached out to keep it from falling.) Coincidentally, I recently blogged on this topic and the upshot for me anyway is that I just don’t think we can “prove” our point with OT or NT commands. I love a cappella singing, and it is certainly not condemned by God but I choose to not argue this particular point with those who worship where instruments are used. I think we have bigger things to talk about :-)

      • Stephen R. Bradd 3:08 pm on April 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Interesting point about 2 Sam 6. The touching of the ark was when Uzzah was punished; that we know for certain. We know the transporting on the cart was unauthorized (and the musical accompaniment may have been also). God tolerated certain things under the OT (cf. Acts 17:30); other things He did not tolerate.

        Regarding your closing comments, I suspect Uzzah, Nadab, Abihu, Cain, etc. might think they had bigger things to talk about, too, than simply doing things in a way that cannot be wrong (in this discussion–a capella singing). Someone might argue that we have bigger things to talk about than immersion (“after all, the Bible doesn’t explicitly condemn sprinkling”–they might affirm). Let us not open the floodgates of human opinion. Let’s just strive to be fully pleasing the Lord always (Col. 1:10). Congregational singing (in spirit & truth) is pleasing to God. No one can know today if God is pleased when a piano is added; they may presume to know, but they cannot have any certainty about it (cf. Isa. 55:8,9). More significantly (in my view) is the fact that the brother who forces his presumptuous behavior into the assembly (which is what happened over 100 years ago) needlessly divides the body of Christ. Division is a sin condemned throughout Scripture; unity is commanded (1 Cor. 1:10). God is the judge, but I sure wouldn’t want to stand before Him (as our Christian church friends will) as one who initiated [or MAINTAINED] division over something they view as a matter of OPINION.

    • Ron Thomas 5:08 am on April 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      FWIW, Stephen, in the Jewish commentary I have there is no mention of an instrument authorized in one place and not another.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 12:17 pm on April 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        I understand Ron. I was relaying the perspective of at least one modern Jew, however (Nick’s father). There are some in the brotherhood who question whether instrumental music was EVER authorized under the OT. They believe David was an innovator and God merely tolerated such for the time being (like He did polygamy). But, I don’t believe those who argue such can deal properly with 2 Chr 29:25. That verse provides clear OT authority for instrumental accompaniment IN the temple. I know of no other verses that provide clear authority for the appropriateness of their use in any other location, however. There may be other examples of their use, but a record in the Bible of an account of action doesn’t intrinsically convey divine approval (e.g., OT polygamy)–though it does imply some level of tolerance on God’s part (cf. Acts 17:30).

        Bottom line–this thread was something of interest to me. It doesn’t change anything regarding what we are authorized to do today in Christian worship. And that leads me now to reply to Terry…

    • Eugene Adkins 6:14 am on April 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I had heard the samething about synagouge worship. Although I had never actually talked to a Jew about it. The only other thing that I can think of that someone may bring up would be the worship found in the Psalms. I know from time to time in the discussion of instrumental music/rock-n-roll during worship, some bring up the example of the Psalms.

    • Terry 9:05 am on April 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, we’re mostly in agreement. However, it is evident – to us today anyway – that those you mentioned clearly violated a mandate set out by God and likewise God also gives us clear examples of baptism, from the manner in which Christ was baptized (albeit for different reasons) to the multitude of examples of immersion in Acts.. My point on instrumental music is that we can’t “prove” this point with scripture. We can certainly make the case for a capella being pleasing to God and conforming to passages that refer to singing. But I believe we start down the slippery slope of human opinion into a quagmire of legalism when we try to make scripture’s silence say something it doesn’t. If an acquaintance or friend worships where mechanical instruments are present, I’d rather use my influence to explore issues such as obedience to the will of God and how to worship Him in spirit and truth and let them wrestle with their conscience on whether they can do that with mechanical musical accompaniment. I agree I don’t want to stand in judgment for causing any division. Members of our own brotherhood have divided over issues such as one-cup communion, eating in the church building, using modern music, supporting orphanages, etc. All of them felt their position was grounded in scripture too. Thanks for an interesting discussion, and I hope you have a blessed week.

    • John Henson 11:05 pm on April 15, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      For the last two weeks, I’ve been studying this and cannot find any proof that God authorized instruments. There is some evidence that the use of stringed instruments was a custom in idol temples. I’m wondering if David added the practice since idolaters were doing it and he wanted his worship to be like the other nations.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 6:06 am on April 16, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Hi John. Admittedly, many passages seem to suggest they may have been an innovation of David. But, 2 Chronicles 29:25 removes all doubt, I think, about their divine authorization (at least in the tabernacle/temple)–”And he stationed the Levites in the house of the Lord with cymbals, with stringed instruments, and with harps, according to the commandment of David, of Gad the king’s seer, and of Nathan the prophet; for THUS WAS THE COMMANDMENT OF THE LORD [emp. added] by His prophets.”

  • Stephen R. Bradd 1:41 pm on March 30, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Prayer request 

    Fellows, my wife & I were blessed to have a 3 hour Bible study last night with 2 friends who are currently members of the independent Christian church. The study went very well! They are wonderful people & I believe they want to do what is right (though making changes is always difficult). They left late last night with a lot to think about. Please pray for them! We will be getting together for more studying soon.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 10:11 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: cheaters, cheetahs   

    Endangered Species 

    My wife and I were flipping through TV channels the other
    night, and we settled for a while on one of those wildlife
    programs — this one was about the cheetah.

    A thought occurred to me. “You know why they’re endangered,
    don’t you?” I said.

    She nodded. “It’s that old saying, ‘Cheetahs never
    prosper.’”

    (also not original with me!) :)

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:07 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Obeying God’s commands 

    Our job is not to reason why.
    Our job is not to make reply.
    Our job is but to do and die.

     
    • Ron Thomas 9:13 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I like the saying, though I am not sure I would entirely accept its sentiments.

    • Stephen R. Bradd 9:29 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Hi Ron. Let me elaborate and see if I can get you on board completely. :) The ambiguity of brevity makes you cautious; I understand.

      When God issues a command:
      (1) Our job is not to figure out the rationale behind His command (in many cases, the rationale may be apparent to us, but it is not our JOB to understand why or even agree with it).
      (2) We don’t need to make reply to God regarding His commands (e.g., argue with Him, ask for another way, beg for an exception, etc.). That’s not our job either.
      (3) Our job IS to obey Him for life and die faithfully. That’s what a good servant does in respect to His Master.

      I use this little poem (not original with me, by the way) when teaching from Gen. 22 (although it can be well applied all over the Bible, I think). Abraham didn’t need to understand the rationale behind the command to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham didn’t need to argue with God or ask if there was something else he could do. He got up early and did it! Why? Because God said so–end of story.

      If more folks were like Abraham in this, we wouldn’t have problems with commands pertaining to singing, divorce & remarriage, immersion for the remission of sins, etc.

      • Ron Thomas 9:40 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        No fussing from me! good thoughts. I have been brought on board – or sold a bill of goods, but I like the former better. :)

    • Don Ruhl 10:06 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I like that, Stephen! I will use it for my “Ruhl’s Rules,” in our bulletin, and then next week it will appear on our web site.

      Don Ruhl

    • Don Ruhl 10:09 am on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      In fact, the more I think about it, I will use it for a sermon. Thanks, brother.

    • Don Ruhl 6:51 pm on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, if that poem is not original with you, do you know who wrote it?

      I am preaching a sermon on this for this coming Lord’s Day.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 7:49 am on April 1, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        I’m sorry to be so slow, Don. I saw your post and got distracted & just thought of it again now.
        I found this on the net regarding the poem–

        Few people remember that the Crimean War was triggered by an argument over whether the Catholic or the Orthodox church had the right to guard the Christian holy places in Palestine. Tennyson praises the soldiers who fought bravely, while criticizing the order as a “blunder.” Nevertheless, he says, the soldiers did their duty: “Their’s not to make reply, Their’s not to reason why, Their’s but to do and die.”

        This is helpful, I think. We are soldiers, as you well know.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 12:26 pm on March 27, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , restaurant   

    Your influence in a restaurant 

    Thought this was worthwhile to think about. 3 minutes in length–

     
    • Don Ruhl 12:54 pm on March 27, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, I have been horrified also by how Christians will treat waiters and waitresses, as though we are God and the server is our personal servant.

      Yet, when Christians are kind, patient, and grateful, it makes a huge impression upon the server.

      Thanks for sharing this.

      Don

    • Mike Riley 4:23 pm on March 27, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I totally agree with this gentleman’s assessment of having proper rapport with a waiter/waitress and proper tip giving. We do leave lasting impressions, and as Christians, we want our impression to be a godly one.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:14 am on March 16, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Euthyphro,   

    Euthyphro’s Dilemma Solved 

    I’ve been quite impressed with most of Greg Koukl’s work. I read his piece on Euthyphro’s dilemma today–and it is excellent. I encountered this dilemma back in a college philosophy class and didn’t know how to properly answer it at the time. This is something you may encounter, if you haven’t already. Even if you never encounter it, it is good to think these things through for your own understanding (in my opinion).

    Bertrand Russell expressed the problem like this: “If you are quite sure there is a difference between right and wrong, you are then in this situation: Is that difference due to God’s fiat or is it not? If it is due to God’s fiat, then for God Himself there is no difference between right and wrong, and it is no longer a significant statement to say that God is good. If you are going to say, as theologians do, that God is good, you must then say that right and wrong have some meaning which is independent of God’s fiat, because God’s fiats are good and not good independently of the mere fact that He made them. If you are going to say that, you will then have to say that it is not only through God that right and wrong came into being, but that they are in
    their essence logically anterior to God.”

    Read the full article here:

    http://www.str.org/site/DocServer/DigitalSG_0312.pdf?docID=6161

     
    • Ron Thomas 10:18 am on March 16, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      As you know what you mentioned is right up my alley. Yes, I am familiar with it, and I have done some reading on it. At the moment I am reading “The Consolation of Philosophy.” If you have not done so, Stephen, get yourself a couple three “history of philosophy” books. It is great learning – for me, anyway.

    • John Henson 11:58 am on March 16, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      The author touches on the Russell’s (and Plato’s) incorrect premise that there are only two choices.

      However, the author is mistaken about an objective law handed down to Abraham. The Patriarchal Law had been in effect since after the Garden of Eden. Was that not an objective law handed down?

      Thomas B. Warren, in his debate with Antony Flew, touched on this “dilemma” by asking which laws were observed in the Nuremberg trials. Of course, the law that was observed was a higher law.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 12:19 pm on March 16, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Hi John. Your point is made. I suppose it depends upon how strictly Koukl is using the term “formally.” Clearly, as you have correctly noted, commandments had been handed down previously. Koukl wouldn’t disagree with this (I don’t believe). He is making a point about revelation & inspiration in a formal sense of writing Scripture (e.g., Moses was the first to do this, as far as we know).

  • Stephen R. Bradd 11:23 am on March 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: intentional silence   

    Intentional Silence 

    SINCE GOD’S SILENCE IS INTENTIONAL, IT IS NOT PERMISSIVE
    When God is silent on a matter, it is not accidental but intentional. This can be deduced from II Peter 1:3 and Jude 3. Since God has given to us “all things that pertain to life and godliness,” then there is nothing of value that He has neglected to share. This truth cannot be overstated. “The faith” has been delivered once for all time. This implies that God has nothing more to reveal to us, and the things He did reveal are precisely what He wanted to reveal. God didn’t forget anything in His word; His silence on certain matters is intentional! We are presumptuous if we think we can or need to improve upon the Scriptures in any way. If we desire to be disciples of Christ, we must abide in His word (John 8:31,32)–which is impossible if we interpret Biblical silence as permissive. If we conclude that where God’s word doesn’t specifically forbid something then we are free to practice it (i.e., the silence-is-permissive approach), we are making a terrible mistake.

    Let us consider three passages to elaborate on this point: II Corinthians 5:7 coupled with Romans 10:17 and Hebrews 11:6. We are to “walk by faith” and “faith comes by hearing” God’s word and “without faith it is impossible to please Him.” In other words, if we desire to please God, we must walk by the word of God. To affirm certain practices as acceptable because the Bible is silent about them is not to walk by faith since faith only comes from hearing the word of God (not silence). This principle of faith is broad and universally applicable in any context.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 3:11 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , presence of God   

    “In the Presence” OR “From the Presence”? 

    Fellows,
    I’ve been chewing on this a while now and can’t figure it out. I’ve got something mixed-up somewhere. Perhaps one of you can enlighten me.

    I’ve suggested before (per my understanding of 2 Thess 1:9) that perhaps the worst aspect of hell could be that the lost will be separated eternally FROM (i.e., away from) the presence of the Lord. I don’t believe we can fully fathom the notion of being separated from God’s goodness in an absolute sense as long as we are here on Earth where all humans (believers or not) continually reap God’s blessings in the material world (sunlight, rain, oxygen, food, etc.).

    And then I come to Rev. 14:10 and am having difficulty reconciling the two verses. Both seem to be speaking about hell for the wicked. But, one teaches that it will be “IN the presence” of the Lord and the other seems to teach the opposite (“FROM the presence”).

    This thought has occurred to me before when thinking about God’s omnipresence and my view on 2 Thess. 1:9. After Judgment Day, God will not be in “hell” in any sense, will He? Thus, those who reside there will be tormented “from” (away from) His presence (not “in” His presence), right?

    Please help me with this if you can.

     
    • Eugene Adkins 3:23 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      What about Psalm 139:7-12? Have you thought of this?

      • Stephen R. Bradd 8:44 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Yes, I’ve considered it but am not convinced it’s applicable since Sheol would be equivalent to Hades (as I understand), and not Gehenna (hell). I’ll surely listen if you have an alternative view to offer on it.

        • Eugene Adkins 7:00 am on March 5, 2012 Permalink

          Let me think on it for a little while.

        • Eugene Adkins 8:00 pm on March 8, 2012 Permalink

          Hey Stephen,

          I’ve thought about it for a little while and I would like to give a suggestion in as short amount of words that I think is possible for me. :)

          As far as the “from” sentence mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 1:9 goes, could it not be correct to say that the “from” punishment mentioned would refer to the lack of ability of those being punished to enjoy/admire the Lord’s presence and glory when verse 10 is taken together with verse 9?

          In other words, when this is taken into account and compared to Revelation 14:10 it would be as though that the Lord sees them, but they do not see the Lord.

          For the Lord to see one, would that necessitate the ability of one to see the Lord?

          Also, do you think that 2 Thessalonians 1:9 and Revelation 14:10 has to be talking about the same punishment? What I mean is, is it possible that when verse 10 of 2 Thessalonians mentions “that day” (to which I take to mean THE day of final judgment) that this is something different than the judgment taking place in Revelation 14:10?

          What do you think?

    • Mike Riley 3:26 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, regarding Revelation 14:10, Burton Coffman comments: “What seems to be indicated is the divine approval and concurrence in their doom. It is not theologically possible to envision the Lamb, in any sense, perpetually beholding the torment of the wicked.”

      • Stephen R. Bradd 8:48 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Thanks for sharing this Mike. I’m not the biggest Coffman fan, though he has written some good things, for sure. I just wish he would enlighten us as to WHY it is not “theologically possible” for the Lamb to envision the perpetual tormenting of the wicked. Fudge would say it is not “theologically possible” for God to perpetual torment anyone, period. (one man’s theological impossibility is another man’s theological reality!) Perhaps Coffman is right, but without some sort of rationale, it’s just an opinion to me.

        • Mike Riley 1:43 pm on March 5, 2012 Permalink

          Yes, it is mere speculation on our part. However, I’m wondering if Habakkuk 1:13 would come into play here.

    • Stephen R. Bradd 8:42 pm on March 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      HI Eugene. Ultimately, I just don’t know. I know there must be some reasonable explanation; I’m just not sure what it is. Perhaps Rev 14:10 isn’t talking about eternal punishment–that would be a good solution to the difficulty (though 14:11 seems to suggest otherwise).

      • Eugene Adkins 9:35 pm on March 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Yeah, I understand what you mean about 14:11.

        One of the things that I kept in mind when I taught through Revelation about a year ago is that all through out the book it seems as if there’s a starting place and ending place, and then it starts all over again from a different perspective. Kinda like an onion that’s getting peeled back. Underneath is the same thing, only we get a different look at it. At least that’s the illustration that I used.

        Revelation chapter 14 does seem like a different look/perspective of what may be seen a little more clearly in chapter 20. It may be possible that 14:9-11 is sort of a small glimpse into what is happening during the time that is mentioned in 20:4-6. Verse 11 of chapter 20 seems to introduce the final judgment which seems different when it’s apposed with the “hour of God’s judgment” mentioned in 14:7.

        Either way, I was just mentioning this since I said I would think about and get back to you. BTW, the lesson from Audio Evangelism today (God’s Promises to Abraham as They Relate to the Church) was very good. I know much of what you mentioned is prevelant where I live, but once I started my blog on wordpress it really made me realize just how important the things you discussed are. Have a great night!

    • J. Randal Matheny 5:30 am on March 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Since we are dealing with figurative language in Revelation at least and perhaps in both passages, we shouldn’t exercise ourselves overly much on it. In Thessalonians, presence would seem to indicate the fellowship with God that brings his every blessing. In Revelation, the point seems to be that their suffering will be evident to all. Just because they are punished “in front of” the angels and the Lamb (NET), doesn’t mean they share in the blessed presence of God.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 2:24 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: baby names, sonogram   

    Sonogram results 

    According to Ranae’s sonogram on Thursday, we have been blessed with another Bradd baby with standard equipment (i.e., a 5th son).

    We’ve had a girl’s name ready for 10 years now, but alas, the negotiating has begun for the name of this son.

    I kidded my wife that since we already have 4 A-names (Adin, Abel, Abram, & Amos), we should move on to the letter B–just to mess with people’s minds. :) She wasn’t as amused as I was.

    The challenge is that we picked the name “Adin” because we liked it (and we wanted to use a Bible name that had a positive connotation). We did the same for “Abel” without thinking too much about getting locked in to A-names. But there we were. Abram & Amos came next. And now we debate the 5th Bible, positive connotation A-name. Actually, quite by accident, all of our current boys’ names use the LONG-A sound. That’d be nice to maintain, too. Oh yes, and it has to be a name we both like! LOL

    Something is gonna give some where. Although I kind of like the name Asaph, Ranae shook her head and replied: “Can you imagine yelling that name down the street? Asaph! Asaph!” I responded: “Yes. What’s your point?” :)

    Some of the others on the short list of potentials so far:
    Aaron, Abner, Ananias, Andrew, Apollos, Asher

    My wife loves the last choice listed. I like it too, save for the fact that the world already has an Asher Bradd living a couple counties away (cousin).

    Have a wonderful day, fellows!

     
    • Eugene Adkins 2:54 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Congrats, Stephen! If you’re looking for suggestions for other names that start with “A” what about “Asa”? He wasnt’ perfect, but the Bible says some good things about his willingness to follow after God in his heart (1 Kings 15). My wife suggested you guys might start back over from the beginning with “Adam.”

    • Mike Riley 3:19 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, congratulations to you and your wife regarding the new addition to your family! May God grant your new son many years in His service.

    • J. Randal Matheny 8:17 pm on March 4, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Congrats, Stephen! Who knows, maybe sixth time’s charm. :)

      • Stephen R. Bradd 8:41 am on March 5, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Thanks brothers. ASA might have some potential. It even continues the long-A sound tradition. Ultimately, it depends on the wife’s reception of it. :)

        Randal, only the Lord knows whether there will be a 6th time and what kind of chromosomes may be involved. :)

    • Weylan Deaver 10:22 am on March 5, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Congratulations! With Eugene, I can say my wife has always liked “Asa” (though we did not use it, ourselves). Don’t discount the possibility of “Ahimelech,” a priest murdered by King Saul for helping David. Now, how many Ahimelech Bradds could there be within a tri-county radius of you?

    • Chad Dollahite 1:44 pm on March 8, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      There’s always Ahab! Or his equally-despicable son, Ahaziah (perhaps a first/middle name combo there?). And, don’t forget Achan, Agag, & Ahaz. I know, I know…I’m not helpful…I just miss the fun of going through this with our 4 children. I nearly drove my wife crazy sometimes!

  • Stephen R. Bradd 8:18 am on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Carbonite   

    CARBONITE – how to EASILY prevent data loss (even if your laptop gets stolen or destroyed) 

    Seeing Chad’s post about stolen laptops makes me sad. For those who may be unaware, there is a great program called Carbonite that I’ve used for several years now. The cost is $60 per year (a little over a dollar per week for peace of mind!). There is no storage limit (I’ve got 168 gigabites stored on their servers–55,000 files). The BEST part is that once you install the software, it works in the background automatically. You don’t have to think about it! Anything you save on your computer (pics, word docs, power point, music, etc.) is automatically backed up on line without you having to do anything!

    Years ago I used to back up on DVDs, etc. But, I’d go months (sometimes longer) without remembering. And even then, what if my house burns down or blows away and the backups get destroyed, too?

    With Carbonite, I simply buy a new computer/laptop, log on to Carbonite, hit RESTORE and all of my files will start downloading to my new machine! (makes upgrading to a new computer easy, too).

    One final benefit of Carbonite–say you’re away from all your files at home, but you have access to the internet. No problem! Just log on to Carbonite, and you can open any of your files that have been backed up on their servers!

    I love Carbonite! Although I do not get paid for this infomercial, if you decide to get a subscription, tell me before you do and I can get you a discount (as well as tacking on a few free months for myself). :)

     
    • Ron Thomas 8:26 am on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I have it and had to make use of it to restore when I had a crash on both computers. Now I have three backup: thumb drive, portable hard drive, and Carbonite.

    • Barbara Oliver 9:34 am on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Sounds good to me Stephen. I am having problems with my main computer, so this would be a great option before the inevitable crash happens.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 11:21 am on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Hi Barbara. I just sent you an email link where you can sign up + get a free month.

    • Larry Miles 11:10 am on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen– I have Carbonite and I love it–thanks for bringing the info to TFR

    • Stevelucas 1:59 pm on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen, is the service specific per user? For example, would there be a separate charge for you and your spouse? Either way, please do send any available information. At this rate, your “uncompensated ” infomercial is most appreciated!

      • Stephen R. Bradd 6:05 pm on February 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply

        Hi Steve. The $60 per year is PER COMPUTER. But, depending upon how you are set up, it is possible to cover more than 1 computer in some situations. For example, in our home there is 1 desktop and 2 laptops. I’ve got the Carbonite subscription on the desktop and treat that harddrive as a “server” (so to speak). If I’m upstairs working on my laptop, anything I save gets saved to the desktop harddrive in the basement (made possible via networking). The only time I would save anything to the laptop itself is if I was traveling (and then I will move all of those files to the main computer when I get home). It works for us–it may not for you. I prefer this method (having all files on 1 machine) as opposed to having files scattered across several machines (and not being able to find what I want).

        • Stevelucas 10:32 pm on February 22, 2012 Permalink

          Thanks Stephen for the ideas. Could you provide a link (especially since it sounds like you can get free time by proving the info)?

        • Stephen R. Bradd 11:32 pm on February 22, 2012 Permalink

          Hello again Steve. I just sent you an email with the link.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 2:28 pm on February 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Valentine Breakfast 

    Enjoyed a wonderful breakfast full of good fellowship at the church building this morning. Annual tradition here where the boys & men cook for and serve the ladies on the Saturday before the 14th. It always works out well. Plus, it reminds some of the men that they don’t have much time left to get ready for the 14th! :)

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:59 am on February 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply  

    Superoptimist 

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:55 am on February 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Humor 

    I love to laugh & enjoy good humor! Occasionally, I mistakenly take it too far (with folks who don’t share the same liberal sense of humor).

    My sense of humor is broad. The Three Stooges really tickle my funny bone, but I’m open to any type of clean humor (whether “intellectual” or “stupid” humor). This is one reason why I enjoy preachers’ meeting so much. :)

    My favorite all-time line–Moe says (as a serious compliment) to Larry–”Ya know, for a guy with no brains, you’re a genius!!”
    LOL

     
    • B.Esudas 9:25 pm on February 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I too like them brother. It helps to get the attension of the audience and to make them better understanding of the sermon.

    • J. Randal Matheny 11:08 am on February 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Great line from Moe!

  • Stephen R. Bradd 8:34 am on February 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , stopped   

    Something I’ve stopped doing recently 

    Answering nudges effectively! :)

    [seriously, I'm with Chad on this one]

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 2:43 pm on February 7, 2012 Permalink | Reply  

    Cartoon 

    A friend sent me this. I laughed, though some may cry.

     
    • Stevelucas 7:06 pm on February 7, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      For those so fortunate, it is funny; for others, it is sad. I am glad to hear that for you it was funny. You must have a good leadership! Praise God.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 11:25 am on January 31, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Why Study the OT? 

    My favorite subject in school was Mathematics. One of my least favorite subjects was Literature. Math was always exciting to me, but reading literary works was typically a chore. My motivation for reading was often lacking–especially when it came to older novels. It wasn’t that I had difficulty reading, but, as a teenager, I failed to see much benefit in studying those works of old. Looking back upon my years of public schooling, I know that I did not put forth my best effort and failed to learn all I could have in this area.

    I wonder if some Christians have a tendency to view the Old Testament in the same manner as I viewed many literary works. Although it is doubtful that many children of God would affirm that the Old Testament is pointless for man today, nevertheless, by their actions, some Christians treat the Old Testament as an irrelevant and useless document of antiquity.

    Friends, let us never forget that God’s word, the Bible, is composed of sixty-six books–thirty-nine of which are in the Old Testament. How many of those first thirty-nine books have you studied in depth? How many of them have you even read from beginning to end? How many of them could you find quickly, if asked to do so? Tragically, there are many books in the Old Testament that most Christians know little, if anything, about.

    Perhaps you are wondering: “So what, Stephen! The Old Testament is no longer binding upon man today; we live under the New Testament and are to be guided by the doctrines taught therein. Why should we spend our time studying in the Old Testament?”

    Such is an appropriate question, but before I answer it, let me say this: It is true that God does not expect anyone living today to pattern his or her life around the Old Testament. It has been superseded by the authority of the New Testament (Heb. 8:6,7,13). However, that is not to say that the Old Testament does not serve a purpose for man today. Listen to what Paul wrote about this matter in Rom. 15:4 – “For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.” The apostle Paul was most certainly referring to the Old Testament books, and he provides an inspired answer to our question.

    Christians should spend time studying the Old Testament because there is much to be learned therein. Without the Old Testament, we would be ignorant about the details of the creation, specifically the origin of man. Without the Old Testament, there is much about God and His nature that we would not learn. Without the Old Testament, much of the history of God’s children would be unknown. Without the Old Testament, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prove that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. Without the Old Testament, it would be impossible to understand and defend much of the New Testament (since there are hundreds of Old Testament references found within the New Testament). Without the Old Testament, we would be without many examples that were recorded for our admonition (I Cor. 10:11). Although the Old Testament is no longer binding upon man today, only a fool would dismiss it as being unworthy of diligent, in depth study.

    Let me leave you with this thought. Though my Literature teachers told me of the benefits of reading and reflecting upon certain literary works, it took me quite a while to believe them. Friends, I hope you will take Paul’s inspired words to heart and realize that the Old Testament was written for your learning. To ignore these books is to deprive oneself of much spiritual nourishment. I pray that you will put forth the effort to mine some of the many jewels that are present within the first thirty-nine books of the Bible.

     
    • Don Ruhl 7:30 am on February 1, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Stephen,

      Good article. The only exception I would state is that I think we overstate the case by saying that non of the Old Testament has application to us, because the New Testament often quotes the Old Testament to show us the way to live or think or something like that.

      Keep encouraging people to read all of God’s word!

      Don Ruhl

  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:18 am on January 26, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , wait   

    Waiting on the Lord 

    The book of Proverbs is full of wise sayings. The Holy Spirit, especially in this book, has packed a lot of wisdom into few words. Proverbs 20:24 is a succinct verse I’ve been contemplating recently – “A man’s steps are of the LORD; how then can a man understand his own way?”

    Although God has granted free will to every human being, man is not in a position to adequately guide himself alone. Man (whether righteous or wicked) cannot understand all the long-term consequences of his daily choices (in both word and deed), but God certainly does understand and is very much involved in the lives of those made in His image. He is Master over everything–including that which we do not understand and cannot presently perceive. I believe that this verse addresses the providential guiding of Almighty God. God knows the end from the beginning; He knows how to work out things for good in the ultimate sense for those who love Him (cf. Rom. 8:28).

    So, what should we do in light of these truths? We should wait upon the Lord! We should confess our own ignorance and insufficiency before God and trust Him–even when it feels like He has forgotten us or is working against us. We should serve God to the best of our ability, even when we do not understand why certain things are or are not happening in our lives presently. I have compiled a list of verses from the Old Testament on this theme that I’d like to read at this time:

    Psalm 25:1-5 – “To You, O LORD, I lift up my soul. O my God, I trust in You; let me not be ashamed; let not my enemies triumph over me. Indeed, let no one who waits on You be ashamed; let those be ashamed who deal treacherously without cause. Show me Your ways, O LORD; teach me Your paths. Lead me in Your truth and teach me, for You are the God of my salvation; on You I wait all the day.”

    Psalm 37:1-7 – “Do not fret because of evildoers, nor be envious of the workers of iniquity. For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb. Trust in the LORD, and do good; dwell in the land, and feed on His faithfulness. Delight yourself also in the LORD, and He shall give you the desires of your heart. Commit your way to the LORD, trust also in Him, and He shall bring it to pass. He shall bring forth your righteousness as the light, and your justice as the noonday. Rest in the LORD, and wait patiently for Him.”

    Psalm 52:8,9 – “I trust in the mercy of God forever and ever. I will praise You forever, because You have done it; and in the presence of Your saints I will wait on Your name for it is good.”

    Proverbs 20:22 – “Wait for the LORD, and He will save you.”

    Isaiah 30:18 – “For the LORD is a God of justice; blessed are all those who wait for Him.”

    Isaiah 40:31 – “But those who wait on the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles. They shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint.”

    Jeremiah 14:22 – “Are there any among the idols of the nations that can cause rain? Or can the heavens give showers? Are You not He, O LORD our God? Therefore we will wait for You, since You have made all these.”

    Zephaniah 3:8 – “‘Therefore wait for Me,’ says the LORD…”

    Although the contexts vary from which these verses are taken, the general theme is very clear. Wait on the Lord–in other words, trust Him enough to serve Him and rely upon Him in crisis and in the good times. He will take care of you and see you through! Is there something you strongly desire to be added to your life but God has not blessed you with yet (like a godly mate, for example; cf. Prov. 18:22)? Wait on the Lord; He knows what is best for you and His timing is perfect. Is there something you strongly desire to have removed from your life but God has not done so yet (like a thorn in the flesh, for example; cf. II Cor. 12:7ff)? Wait on the Lord; He knows what is best for you and His timing is perfect. Indeed, “a man’s steps are of the Lord” (Prov. 20:24). There is nothing better for a Christian to do than to trust and obey God, no matter what. Such a course will lead to joy and peace that passes understanding.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:14 am on January 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: interest rate, mortgage, refinance   

    Low interest rates 

    Hello fellows. I realize this is not a typical TFR post, but it might save you some big money depending upon your mortgage situation, so here goes.

    Interest rates are super low right now. I thought we got a good deal 3 years ago when we refinanced at 4.875%. Our current lender, EverHome, sent us a letter yesterday saying 10 year loans are now at 3.25%! (15 year loans are at 3.50%). I went ahead and started the refinancing process again to save about $4000 over 10 years (saving about 6 monthly payments at the end).

    They will come to the house for the closing, so it’s only a couple hours max of inconvenience total. The closing costs & appraisal fees are added in to the new loan and there is still the $4000 savings for us. So, there is essentially no money out of pocket to do this. Just a phone call and a little bit of time to sign the papers in your home after the appraisal is done.

    If your current rate is near 5% or above, you could probably save some big bucks, too, and you might be able to shorten your mortgage duration dramatically thanks to all the interest you won’t have to pay at the lower rate.

    Just thought I’d share in case you could benefit from refinancing, but perhaps hadn’t thought about it recently.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 11:55 am on December 13, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , theistic evolution   

    Letter to the Editor: Theistic Evolution & the Bible–Like Oil & Water 

    [Fellows, Weinberg had a friend reply to my rebuttal of his Dec 2nd article. I just finished another reply which I will submit soon. If you have any suggestions for improvement, please share them ASAP. Thanks! -SRB]

    I enjoyed reading Paul Williams’ piece in the “Speaking of Religion” section from December 9th. Williams made some good points and is correct is noting the complexity of the issue, but he made some fatal assumptions on the way to his conclusion.

    Williams stated: “Let us assume God chose to use both Creation and Evolution…” That’s a rather significant assumption, don’t you think? We should ask two questions here: (1) Is it possible? Sure it’s possible. God could have used evolutionary processes if He desired. (2) Is it probable? In order for something to be probable, there must be some evidence to suggest it as the most likely explanation. I do not believe the evidence warrants the conclusion that macroevolution has happened at all—either orchestrated by God or by chance, random processes.

    Williams concluded by saying: “The point of this argument was to prove that God is not limited in his selection of methods for advancing his plans.” I agree with the conclusion, though not with the reasoning he used to arrive at it. God could have used whatever method of creation He wanted, but this doesn’t dismiss the fact that He said He created everything out of nothing in six days (cf. Exodus 20:11), and I believe Him! It’s not a matter of me lacking the humility to embrace a form of theistic evolution. If the Bible affirmed it, I would believe it. I am glad Williams’ believes in God, but he must not believe in the God of the Bible to argue as he has. If the Bible is true (and there is much internal and external evidence to show that it is, which I’d be glad to consider with anyone—Stephen@AudioEvangelism.com), then what it records about origins is correct. There is simply no way to insert any form of theistic evolution into Genesis 2:7 – “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” Man become a living being when God breathed into his nostrils, not when an ape mutated into a human! Either we accept the Bible or we don’t.

    Finally, one cannot believe in Jesus as the Son of God and bringer of truth if Williams’ form of theistic evolution is correct. Jesus stated in Mark 10:6 – “From the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.” The word “beginning” is critical here. I believe that mankind has been around since the end of the very first week of the Earth’s history (day 6, to be specific). Thus, humans have been around “from the beginning,” as Jesus taught. Williams, on the other hand, has humans arriving millions or billions of years after the beginning (via some form of evolution). Under his current assumptions, Williams cannot affirm that humans have been around “from the beginning” of creation. So, who is right? I’ll stick with Jesus and the Bible every time.

    Stephen R. Bradd
    Clinton Church of Christ

     
    • Ron Thomas 12:00 pm on December 13, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      It is good, Stephen. You have sufficiently challenged the previous remarks, but left enough open for him to reply in such a way that he commits himself. I hope he does. You have done well.

    • Chad Dollahite 12:39 pm on December 13, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      Excellent, Stephen….great points!

    • Eugene Adkins 3:51 pm on December 13, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      If you’re looking for editing – first paragraph “is correct is” probably should’ve been “is correct in”???

      Good points Stephen and God bless. Genesis’ account leaves no room for the evolution of man. A woman evolving out of a man? Whoa! If a person takes Genesis’ account as “poetical” and they place evolution over the creation account then a person must believe that a male and female of a certain “species” (whatever we “evolved” from) managed to evolve at the same time so they could have the ability to procreate.

      I appreciate your willingness to publicy discuss the issue in the paper.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 12, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Reconciliation with Benjamin (JUDGES 21) 

    The final chapter of Judges is about reconciliation with Benjamin and about solving a problem that had been created by an oath Israel had made previously. “Now the men of Israel had sworn an oath at Mizpah, saying, ‘None of us shall give his daughter to Benjamin as a wife.’ Then the people came to the house of God, and remained there before God till evening. They lifted up their voices and wept bitterly, and said, ‘O LORD God of Israel, why has this come to pass in Israel that today there should be one tribe missing in Israel?’” (21:1-3). Although they defeated Benjamin, no one is happy. These are fellow Israelites they had slain in this civil war, and they grieved over the loss (and rightfully so; cf. Ezek. 33:11). Since they had pledged not to give any wives to Benjamin, the 600 men who remained would have no way to perpetuate their tribe (without sinning by marrying foreigners). What could be done? Israel had punished Benjamin but did not want the tribe to become extinct.

    A solution is arrived at, and it is connected to another oath they had made at Mizpah. If any city in Israel was not represented in their meeting against Benjamin, that city would be destroyed. The nation had expected complete support from all the tribes against the terrible deed that had been done at Gibeah. Being lethargic or not wanting to get involved was deemed unacceptable and punishable! They learn that no one from Jabesh Gilead had supported the cause. “So the congregation sent out there twelve thousand of their most valiant men, and commanded them, saying, ‘Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead with the edge of the sword, including the women and children. And this is the thing that you shall do: You shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman who has known a man intimately.’ So they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead four hundred young virgins who had not known a man intimately; and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan” (21:10-12).

    Although they could have completely destroyed all inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead, they spare the virgins in order to give them to the Benjamites. Israel announces peace with Benjamin and the 600 men return to their territory. They receive the 400 virgins as wives, but there remained 200 men of Benjamin who did not have a wife.

    “Then the elders of the congregation said, ‘What shall we do for wives for those who remain, since the women of Benjamin have been destroyed?’ And they said, ‘There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe may not be destroyed from Israel. However, we cannot give them wives from our daughters, for the children of Israel have sworn an oath, saying, ‘Cursed be the one who gives a wife to Benjamin.’ Then they said, ‘In fact, there is a yearly feast of the LORD in Shiloh, which is north of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.’ Therefore they instructed the children of Benjamin, saying, ‘Go, lie in wait in vineyards, and watch; and just when the daughters of Shiloh come out to perform their dances, then come out from the vineyards, and every man catch a wife for himself from the daughters of Shiloh; then go to the land of Benjamin. Then it shall be, when their fathers or their brothers come to us to complain, that we will say to them, ‘Be kind to them for our sakes, because we did not take a wife for any of them in the war; for it is not as though you have given the women to them at this time, making yourselves guilty of your oath’” (21:16-22).

    Although this solution may strike a chord of humor with us, it worked for them and the 200 men of Benjamin followed instructions and caught wives for themselves (i.e., they stole by consent)! The men of Benjamin then returned home and rebuilt their cities. The name of Benjamin was not extinguished in Israel! When reflecting upon Judges 19-21, it is incredible to contemplate that the immoral behavior of a small group of men led ultimately to a civil war where over 65,000 perished! Friends, our actions have consequences. Even behavior that we may deem to be small or insignificant in the scheme of things may have a dramatic impact in ways we cannot calculate. May we always seek to do what is right by God’s standard and trust Him to take care of us! Right always triumphs in the end!

    The book closes with a sentiment we have seen previously – “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (21:25). If only God had truly been their king! That is what He desired; and His leadership is exactly what the nation needed!

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 9, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    War Against Benjamin (JUDGES 20) 

    The Levite’s concubine had essentially been raped to death by perverted men from the tribe of Benjamin. He carried her corpse home with him on his donkey for a special reason. “When he entered his house he took a knife, laid hold of his concubine, and divided her into twelve pieces, limb by limb, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel. And so it was that all who saw it said, ‘No such deed has been done or seen from the day that the children of Israel came up from the land of Egypt, until this day. Consider it, confer, and speak up!’” (Jud. 19:29,30). The Levite used her corpse to send an important message to the twelve tribes of Israel. A great injustice had been committed and action needed to be taken! The tribes realize this is not an insignificant matter, so they assemble “as one man before the LORD at Mizpah” (20:1). Some 400,000 soldiers gather and ask for more information from the Levite. He spoke of the lewdness committed by the men of Gibeah (of the tribe of Benjamin). Their actions were outrageous and the nation was in agreement as to their response:

    “‘None of us will go to his tent, nor will any turn back to his house; but now this is the thing we will do to Gibeah: We will go up against it by lot. We will take ten men out of every hundred throughout all the tribes of Israel, a hundred out of every thousand, and a thousand out of every ten thousand, to make provisions for the people, that when they come to Gibeah in Benjamin, they may repay all the vileness that they have done in Israel.’ So all the men of Israel were gathered against the city, united together as one man” (20:8-11).

    “Then the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, ‘What is this wickedness that has occurred among you? Now therefore, deliver up the men, the perverted men who are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and remove the evil from Israel!’ But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the children of Israel. Instead, the children of Benjamin gathered together from their cities to Gibeah, to go to battle against the children of Israel” (20:12-14). The nation has taken appropriate action here against Benjamin. They expect the wicked men who committed this crime to be turned over for execution. Such was in keeping with the Mosaic law. The tribe of Benjamin, however, instead of doing the right thing, protects the perverts and is willing to fight and die for them. How foolish! Friends, even if our own flesh and blood does wrong, we cannot defend and fight for family against the law of righteousness! It is a mistake to love family more than God and His ways (cf. Matt. 10:37).

    One would think a battle of 400,000 men versus 26,000 would not last long. However, Israel did not send up all of these men to fight at one time. “Then the children of Israel arose and went up to the house of God to inquire of God. They said, ‘Which of us shall go up first to battle against the children of Benjamin?’ The LORD said, ‘Judah first!’ So the children of Israel rose in the morning and encamped against Gibeah” (20:18,19). The first day of battle was disastrous for Israel! They lost 22,000 men and Benjamin lost less than 1000! But how can this be? After all, Israel is trying to execute justice, and they had consulted God regarding how to attack Benjamin! Why did they lose the first day? No answer is given in the text, but here is a reasonable suggestion: Israel was punished severely for their indirect role in the wickedness that had been committed at Gibeah. Had the Israelites driven out the foreigners completely to start with, then this problem of sexual immorality probably wouldn’t have happened! No doubt it was the corrupting influence of the Canaanite people where the men of Gibeah had learned their perverted behavior. Even though the nation is trying to do the right thing here, their behavior overall has been far from perfect (e.g., idolatry) and God may be using this as an occasion to discipline all of the tribes. There is a lesson here even for us: Success is not always guaranteed, even when we do the right thing! God may discipline us for illicit behavior on whatever time frame He sees fit. So, ultimately, do not allow physical success or failure to guide you; do what is right in God’s eyes and don’t quit–no matter what happens!

    “And the people, that is, the men of Israel, encouraged themselves and again formed the battle line at the place where they had put themselves in array on the first day. Then the children of Israel went up and wept before the LORD until evening, and asked counsel of the LORD, saying, ‘Shall I again draw near for battle against the children of my brother Benjamin?’ And the LORD said, ‘Go up against him’” (20:22,23). So, at God’s direction, they fight a second day. The results are not much different than the first! Benjamin suffers minimal losses and Israel loses another 18,000 men! Israel fasts and offers sacrifices to the LORD. Then they ask yet again if they should continue battling against Benjamin. “And the LORD said, ‘Go up, for tomorrow I will deliver them into your hand’” (20:28).

    The third day of battle looked about the same as the others at the start, but Israel had an ambush for Benjamin and enjoyed a great victory by the end of the day. The ambush was similar to what had been effectively employed against the Canaanite city of Ai (cf. Josh. 8). “The LORD defeated Benjamin before Israel. And the children of Israel destroyed that day twenty-five thousand one hundred Benjamites; all these drew the sword” (20:35). “And the men of Israel turned back against the children of Benjamin, and struck them down with the edge of the sword–from every city, men and beasts, all who were found. They also set fire to all the cities they came to” (20:48). In all, only 600 men of the tribe of Benjamin survived! That’s less than 3% of all their warriors! These 600 men fled to the wilderness for safety and remained there four months. All women and children of Benjamin perished when their cities were destroyed.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 8, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    The Levite’s Concubine & Gibeah’s Crime (JUDGES 19) 

    Judges 19 focuses on an unnamed Levite who resided in the remote mountains of Ephraim. “He took for himself a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. But his concubine played the harlot against him, and went away from him to her father’s house at Bethlehem in Judah, and was there four whole months. Then her husband arose and went after her, to speak kindly to her and bring her back, having his servant and a couple of donkeys with him. So she brought him into her father’s house; and when the father of the young woman saw him, he was glad to meet him” (Jud. 19:1-3).

    This woman was unfaithful to her husband and ended up going home to her father. After some time had passed, the Levite sought to be reconciled to her. He was willing to forgive her, and her father was very kind to him. In fact, as the text describes, the father was so hospitable that he kept the Levite there much longer than he originally intended to stay. One gets the sense that the father would have gladly kept his daughter and her husband with him indefinitely, if given the chance! Finally, on the fifth day, the Levite and his concubine left in the afternoon. Leaving at that hour would not allow them to travel all the way home in one day. Thus, they would have to stay overnight somewhere. And as they traveled – “They were near Jebus [i.e., Jerusalem, -SRB], and the day was far spent; and the servant said to his master, ‘Come, please, and let us turn aside into this city of the Jebusites and lodge in it.’ But his master said to him, ‘We will not turn aside here into a city of foreigners, who are not of the children of Israel; we will go on to Gibeah’” (19:11,12). Although he did not know it at the time, he was not any safer staying with Israelites than with Gentiles! How very sad!

    After arriving in Gibeah after sundown, immediately the Levite looked for shelter. “They turned aside there to go in to lodge in Gibeah. And when he went in, he sat down in the open square of the city, for no one would take them into his house to spend the night” (19:18). The men of Gibeah were Benjamites, although there was one old man staying there who was not of Benjamin. When the old man learned of the Levite’s need for shelter, he gladly volunteered to take care of them, not wanting them to stay in the open square. “So he brought them into his house, and gave fodder to the donkeys. And they washed their feet, and ate and drank” (19:21).

    “As they were enjoying themselves, suddenly certain men of the city, perverted men, surrounded the house and beat on the door. They spoke to the master of the house, the old man, saying, ‘Bring out the man who came to your house, that we may know him carnally!’ But the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, ‘No, my brethren! I beg you, do not act so wickedly! Seeing this man has come into my house, do not commit this outrage. Look, here is my virgin daughter and the man’s concubine; let me bring them out now. Humble them, and do with them as you please; but to this man do not do such a vile thing!’” (19:22-24).

    The similarities between this narrative and Genesis 19 (i.e., Lot and his angelic guests in Sodom) are many, but the differences are significant. In this case, one woman (the Levite’s concubine) is given over to the perverted mob. Such never happened in Lot’s case due to a miraculous intervention. Although it is hard to fathom offering women up to a sexually immoral bunch, we must be cautious in our judgments since we simply have no account of motive recorded. The old man seems honorable and perhaps believes (we cannot be certain) this is the option that will lead to the least amount of suffering or wickedness.

    “And they knew her all night until morning; and when the day began to break, they let her go. Then the woman came as the day was dawning, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, till it was light. When her master arose in the morning, and opened the doors of the house and went out to go his way, there was his concubine, fallen at the door of the house with her hands on the threshold. And he said to her, ‘Get up and let us be going.’ But there was no answer. So the man lifted her onto the donkey; and the man got up and went to his place” (Jud. 19:25-28).

    The woman was raped and essentially murdered; they abused her to death. The Levite, preparing to leave the next morning, evidently did not believe he would see her again. She had managed, however, to make it back to the door of the house before perishing.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 7, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Micah’s Idolatry Spreads (JUDGES 18) 

    Although Micah had made his own god and priest, things do not go well for him as he expected. Judges 18 records the loss of his idols and priest to the tribe of Dan.

    The Danites were “seeking an inheritance” for themselves (cf. Josh. 19:47,48). In other words, they still had not inhabited the full portion of land that was to be theirs in Canaan; there was more conquering to be done. Five men of Dan are sent out as spies and they happened to lodge with Micah in route. They are impressed with Micah’s priest, recognized him as a Levite by his speech, and asked counsel of him: Would their current mission be prosperous? Micah’s priest replied – “Go in peace. The presence of the LORD be with you on your way” (Jud. 18:6). His advice turned out to be good, which shows us that even false prophets get it right some of the time (cf. Deut. 13:1-5). As a side note, even today people can recognize us by our speech–whether it be good or bad. Let us always take heed to our speech (cf. Matt. 12:36,37; Col. 4:6).

    The spies from Dan depart and determine that the territory they desire to conquer is both good and easy to claim. The current inhabitants lacked treaties and would not be able to withstand an attack from the tribe of Dan, the spies believed. After the spies return, 600 men from Dan take up weapons and begin the journey to Laish to conquer it. On their way the group stopped at Micah’s house. They greeted him and proceeded to take “the carved images, the ephod, the household idols, and the molded image” (Jud. 18:17). The priest objected, but they replied – “Be quiet, put your hand over your mouth, and come with us; be a father and a priest to us. Is it better for you to be a priest to the household of one man, or that you be a priest to a tribe and a family in Israel?” (18:19). This pleased the priest and he doesn’t mind stealing from Micah in order to accept this promotion! Some preachers today are only interested in personal gain; they have more in common with this Levite than they do the Lord! “The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep” (John 10:13).

    “Then they turned and departed, and put the little ones, the livestock, and the goods in front of them” (18:21). This was a tactical move; they evidently expect Micah to gather some resistance against them and try to attack them from the rear. Micah does try to organize such a party but it is small and weak compared to the Danites.

    “And they called out to the children of Dan. So they turned around and said to Micah, ‘What ails you, that you have gathered such a company?’ So he said, ‘You have taken away my gods which I made, and the priest, and you have gone away. Now what more do I have? How can you say to me, “What ails you?”‘ And the children of Dan said to him, ‘Do not let your voice be heard among us, lest angry men fall upon you, and you lose your life, with the lives of your household!’ Then the children of Dan went their way. And when Micah saw that they were too strong for him, he turned and went back to his house” (18:23-26).

    What a sad day for Micah the idolater! After being robbed and now threatened by this large force of men, he realizes this is a lost cause and gives up. Evidently his gods weren’t worth dying for (but the true God is!). When there is no ruler in the land, the strongest do as they please and get away with it (in the temporal realm anyway). One can only wonder if Micah went home and made some more useless gods for himself!

    It would have been one thing for the men of Dan to take away the items of false worship in order to destroy them, but unfortunately that was not their intent. They, after successfully conquering Laish, “set up for themselves the carved image; and Jonathan the son of Gershom, the son of Moses, and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land. So they set up for themselves Micah’s carved image which he had made, all the time that the house of God was in Shiloh” (18:30,31). Like leaven, the sins of one man (if unchecked) spread to a larger group of people. The captivity referenced here is certainly not the Babylonian captivity but one of the periods of captivity prior to the reign of King David (e.g., I Sam. 13:19,20).

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 6, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Micah’s Idolatry (JUDGES 17) 

    Judges 17 is the beginning of the closing section of the book of Judges. The book contains no further record of the judges of Israel or of deliverance from enemy oppression. However, these final chapters do give us a better sense of a phrase we have seen repeatedly throughout the book – “Then the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD” (2:11; 3:7,12; 4:1; 6:1; 10:6; 13:1). There was widespread religious corruption among the Israelites. They were not remaining true to God and His word, and it shows in these final five chapters.

    “Now there was a man from the mountains of Ephraim, whose name was Micah. And he said to his mother, ‘The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from you, and on which you put a curse, even saying it in my ears–here is the silver with me; I took it.’ And his mother said, ‘May you be blessed by the LORD, my son!’ So when he had returned the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, ‘I had wholly dedicated the silver from my hand to the LORD for my son, to make a carved image and a molded image; now therefore, I will return it to you.’ Thus he returned the silver to his mother. Then his mother took two hundred shekels of silver and gave them to the silversmith, and he made it into a carved image and a molded image; and they were in the house of Micah. The man Micah had a shrine and made an ephod and household idols; and he consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest. In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Jud. 17:1-6).

    Micah had stolen a large sum of money from his mother but then restored it since he feared her curse. She desired to make images that Micah could put in his shrine. There are numerous problems with Micah’s behavior when measured against the standard of the Mosaic law. Besides the sin of stealing, he had no right to possess household idols (his mother had no right to commission them), nor was there a need to create a shrine, an ephod, or one’s own priesthood! Indeed, Micah’s actions here are tragic indeed, but he wasn’t alone in this type of behavior. Since the nation lacked a leader (or, more accurately, weren’t following God as their true leader) the people did whatever they thought was right and good, but sometimes what they believed to be good was far from it. Being guided by one’s own opinions is always dangerous (cf. Prov. 14:12). The Israelites should have been sacrificing at the tabernacle only by means of the Levitical priests God appointed. Also, creating idols was wrong–even if they were only intended to be representations of Jehovah and not some pagan deity (cf. Exo. 20:4-6; e.g., Exo. 32:4; I Kings 12:28). Micah is inventing his own worship and religion, and God is not pleased!

    “Now there was a young man from Bethlehem in Judah, of the family of Judah; he was a Levite, and was staying there. The man departed from the city of Bethlehem in Judah to stay wherever he could find a place. Then he came to the mountains of Ephraim, to the house of Micah, as he journeyed. And Micah said to him, ‘Where do you come from?’ So he said to him, ‘I am a Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, and I am on my way to find a place to stay.’ Micah said to him, ‘Dwell with me, and be a father and a priest to me, and I will give you ten shekels of silver per year, a suit of clothes, and your sustenance.’ So the Levite went in. Then the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young man became like one of his sons to him. So Micah consecrated the Levite, and the young man became his priest, and lived in the house of Micah. Then Micah said, ‘Now I know that the LORD will be good to me, since I have a Levite as priest!’” (17:7-13).

    Under the Mosaic law, the Levites were to be provided for indirectly, primarily through the sacrifices and offerings of the nation. Why is this young man out looking for work and a place to stay? The most likely answer is that much of the nation was not following the pattern of true worship God had set forth, and the young man’s needs are not being met. If true, this conveys much about the widespread nature of Israel’s spiritual decay. Micah invites this man to be a priest for him and a spiritual father. Micah will take care of him if he would be willing to worship as Micah prescribes. Evidently the young man lacked conviction for truth since he gladly agrees. Micah “consecrated” the man as a priest, not by God’s authority but by his own! He deceives himself into a false sense of security by thinking that now God will be pleased with him since he has a Levite for a priest. Micah evidently realizes that there is a pattern, and he wants to imitate it to the extent that it is convenient for him. He believed that rituals and forms of religion would bring him blessings, but he was mistaken (cf. I Sam. 15:22). This is tragically quite similar to the behavior of many today who want to live for themselves yet have a dose of Christianity on the side. It just doesn’t work that way, friends (cf. Matt. 6:33; 16:24)! God expects complete submission to His will!

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 9:51 am on December 5, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , origin of religion   

    Letter to the Editor – The Origin of Religion 

    [submitted to our local paper today]

    The Origin of Religion – Not so Complicated

    Dr. Weinberg’s December 2nd article regarding the origin of religion is far more complicated than it needs to be. It’s no surprise that those who adhere to evolutionary philosophy would advocate that the first religion “evolved.” But it’s simply not true.

    Consider the wonder of the human body. Who can rationally argue that eons ago life sprang forth from non-life or that a single-celled organism mutated in a beneficial way to produce increasingly complex organisms (millions of times along the way)? Who would believe that a digital camera could have just “happened” on accident due to random, chance processes? No one! Cameras manifest evidence of design, and where there is a design there must be a Designer! Our best cameras are still inferior to the marvelous human eye. So, if a camera cannot “happen” on accident, how can a human eye “happen” on accident since it is superior and much more complex? Yet this is what evolutionists must affirm.

    Is it not more reasonable to simply believe that there is an all-powerful Supreme Being who has always existed and that He chose to create the Universe and everything within it? Since such a Being must exist, is it reasonable to believe that He would reveal Himself to His creation? Indeed it is. The God of the Bible is the only true and living deity. There are many evidences that can be set forth to prove that there is a God and that the Bible is His word. I would enjoy sitting down with anyone to explore these evidences in detail (call me anytime – 217.935.5058).

    Since the Bible is true, we can trust what it says regarding the “origin of religion.” The first human beings, Adam and Eve, knew God in a personal way. They conversed with Him in the Garden of Eden less than 10,000 years ago. God communicated His expectations to them regarding proper religion. They fell into sin and over time most of the human race drifted far from the true God and began embracing many false ideas about religion and the existence of other gods. Monotheism came first, and mankind perverted it into polytheism relatively quickly. Today Jesus has instructed us: “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). The church of Christ endeavors to do just that—worship the one, true God “in spirit and truth.”

    Stephen R. Bradd, Clinton Church of Christ

     
    • Ron Thomas 9:57 am on December 5, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      Very well written. Your telephone number in your LE might get some moron like me calling you, however! I think I’ll go to bed!

    • Weylan Deaver 9:57 am on December 5, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      Good article, Stephen. Keep up the great work. Personally, if it were adding contact info, I would have given an email address rather than a phone number, but, that’s me. Let us know if they publish it.

      • Weylan Deaver 9:58 am on December 5, 2011 Permalink | Reply

        Well, I see Ron has beaten me to the congratulatory punch.

      • Stephen R. Bradd 5:06 am on December 11, 2011 Permalink | Reply

        They did print it Friday (our community paper only comes out on Tue & Fri). Weinberg’s column this week advocates a pitiful form of theistic evolution. I may write him again.

        • Ron Thomas 6:03 am on December 11, 2011 Permalink

          You need to. As often as they will print you, I would encourage you to write. He does not need to go unchallenged.

    • Eugene Adkins 10:15 am on December 5, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      Good response Stephen. I had a conversation/mini-debate with an evolutionist/atheist about my post “Confused about Creation (http://keltonburgpreacher.wordpress.com/2011/11/26/confused-about-creation/) a few days ago and one thing that stuck out to me was that he refused to answer the question of whether or not he believed in “spontaneous generation” or in an “immortal micro-scopic form of life that then became all that we see today.”

      I have heard other atheists say that “religion” is useless but out of the other side of thier mouth say that it “evolved” like the gentleman you’re referring to but I was under the impression that “evolution” gets rid of “useless” things. Just wondering out loud.

  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 5, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Paradoxes of Samson (JUDGES 13-16) 

    Our lessons last week focused upon the life of Samson. Today we will conclude this series on Samson by considering six paradoxes of this great man of faith. These paradoxes should help us remember the key points in Samson’s life.

    PARADOX #1: SAMSON WAS RELIGIOUS YET REBELLIOUS.
    Since there was no one suitable to lead the Israelites against the Philistines, God saw fit to raise up a special man for the task. Samson was “a Nazirite unto God from the womb” (Jud. 13:5). A casual reading of that chapter reveals that the parents of Samson were God-fearing people. They were religious and undoubtedly reared their son to be religious also. However, even though Samson was brought up in a spiritually rich and wholesome environment, he later rebelled. When he was contemplating marriage, he was encouraged to seek a wife from among his own people. He rebelled against the wisdom of his parents and married a Philistine woman. His rebellious nature was further manifested in his illicit sexual encounters. The purity of life which should have characterized one separated to God by the Nazirite vow was mocked by his associations with the harlot in Gaza and also Delilah (Jud. 16:1-21). His rebellious attitude cost him dearly (Jud. 14:20; 16:21).

    PARADOX #2: SAMSON WAS CONSECRATED YET CORRUPT.
    Samson was separated to God from before his birth through the Nazirite vow or a divine modification of it. Thus, he was a consecrated man. However, Samson did not keep the vow as faithfully as he should have. He corrupted himself sexually as noted above. Additionally, he disobeyed God by cutting his hair. It is true that he did not personally cut his hair, but he allowed it to happen. He behaved in an irresponsible way.

    PARADOX #3: SAMSON WAS KNOWLEDGEABLE YET NAIVE.
    Samson’s intelligence and resourcefulness are demonstrated in several ways in the divine record (e.g., the riddle he posed, the manner in which he paid off his debt of thirty garments, his burning of the Philistine crops, the use of a donkey’s jawbone in battle, the removal of city gates to escape, as well as the destruction of the temple of Dagon). But, in spite of moments of brilliance, he often acted foolishly, even naively. His association with Delilah in Judges 16 is a source of constant amazement to me. His previous dealings with the Philistines should have taught him many lessons, not the least of which that they could not be trusted. Also, the first three attempts of Delilah to ascertain the source of Samson’s strength ended with her trying to strip him of that strength. Was he so naive to think that she wouldn’t test him again after he “told her all his heart” (16:7)? Why would Samson knowingly reveal such information to one who had demonstrated not once but three times that she could not be trusted? It truly boggles the mind.

    PARADOX #4: SAMSON WAS AWARE YET APATHETIC.
    Samson knew that the Philistines were nothing but trouble, but he dove into relationship after relationship with them. He knew better than to do this and was certainly aware of the danger he was putting himself in. But, his selfish impulses, combined with an outlook of indifference, ultimately lead to his demise. It appears that he simply didn’t care about the foolish risks he took in his life. One cannot help but wonder if this attitude emerged over the years as a result of trusting in his own physical strength instead of God who made that strength possible!

    PARADOX #5: SAMSON WAS A LEADER YET A LONER.
    Samson, as a leader of Israel, had little support from his brethren. Throughout the narrative of his life, he is seen as a solitary figure standing against the numerous, uncircumcised Philistines. On one occasion, his brethren even turned upon him to deliver him to the enemy for fear of their safety (Jud. 15:9-13). They were content with the situation as it was. They were content with being oppressed by the Philistines! How tragic that they did not rally behind Samson as the leader God had raised up for them!

    PARADOX #6: SAMSON WAS FORCEFUL YET FEEBLE.
    The physical strength which Samson possessed is the quality that stands out in the minds of most people. His “Herculean” feats astound young readers and amaze older ones. He is sometimes pictured as a massive, powerful specimen of muscular physique. However, the source of his strength is often overlooked. It is not to be found in the bulk of his body or even in the length of his locks of hair. His strength was found in “the Spirit of the Lord” which “came upon him mightily” from time to time (e.g., Jud. 13:25; 14:6,19; 15:14). His uncut hair was symbolic of his obedience and he did need it to be strong, but his strength itself certainly wasn’t in his hair–it was in the Lord! It should be noted that it was when Samson was with an ungodly associate that he relinquished the source of his strength. This man of great force was reduced to a feeble boy in the presence of Delilah. It is still true today that ungodly associates cause many people to relinquish the source of their strength. As Paul proclaimed – “Evil companions corrupt good morals” (I Cor. 15:33).

    If I only had a few sentences to sum up Samson’s life, I’d use a quote from Old Testament scholars Keil and Delitzsch: “Samson, when strong and brave, strangled a lion; but he could not strangle his own love. He burst the fetters of his foes, but not the cords of his own lusts. He burned up the crops of others, and lost the fruit of his own virtue when burning with the flame kindled by a single woman.”

    There are other lessons from Samson’s life that could be analyzed, no doubt. But, no matter how long we could continue to enumerate them, they will do little good if left unapplied to our lives. Don’t be too quick to criticize Samson and his character flaws. We often share many of these same paradoxes. Here are just a few applications for Christians to reflect upon and ask themselves:

    Am I guilty of rebelling against the Lord’s will? We are called to be sanctified, or separated to God, but many Christians try to befriend the world. One cannot be a friend of the world without becoming an enemy of God (James 4:4). No man can serve two masters (Matt. 6:24). We cannot hold God’s hand and pat Satan on the back–it just won’t work!
    Am I growing in knowledge of the Holy Scriptures daily? Am I striving to become more wise (Matt. 10:16; James 1:5)? Or, am I still as naive as I was when I first obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ?
    Am I zealous to do what I know is right or am I afflicted with a spirit of apathy and selfishness (Rev. 3:15-17)?
    Am I being the kind of leader that God expects me to be for my family and Christian brethren? Am I endeavoring to work with others (and not against them) for the cause of Christ?
    Am I allowing myself to be led into sin by corrupting influences? Am I choosing my companions wisely or carelessly?

    Dare we sit here in judgment and condemn Samson for his failures? I think not. Especially since, when all was said and done, Samson was faithful! The only way in which I can explain why Samson is listed in Hebrews 11 as a great man of faith is because of his repentance! Samson’s overall life could arguably be described as one governed by faith in Jehovah. But, it is obvious that he was a sinner. Of course, this is true of us, as well as all those who found their way into the list of Hebrews 11. All had blemishes to overcome, but all overcame them to live lives dedicated to the service of God. Many of them were far from perfect, but they were faithful! When one considers the failings of these heroes, let him remember that divine approval of an individual in one aspect of his life does not necessarily imply that there is divine approval of that individual in all aspects of his character and conduct.

    As one reads Judges 16:28-31, Samson’s repentance should be evident. Samson had faith in God. He asked for Jehovah to remember him. Samson had enjoyed fellowship with God. He asked God to strengthen him one more time. No doubt Samson remembered the times he and the Lord had reaped victories for the cause of Israel against the Philistines. Samson’s final act was for God, and that’s why he is a great man of faith!

    But, what about you and I? Our history is being written too, so to speak. The decisions we make in our lifetime and the way in which we serve God will ultimately determine whether we too will be great men and women of faith. What do you think would have happened to Samson had he died before he restored his fellowship with God? He would have been lost! However, because of Samson’s repentance, the Lord accepted him again, allowing him to do his greatest work in his death. God has the same grace for His people who will return to Him today.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 2, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Samson, Part 5 (JUDGES 16) 

    As we continue in Judges 16:4ff, Samson’s lust is seen again in his relationship with Delilah. She was bribed with a large amount of silver in order to deceive Samson and discover the source of his strength. She began by simply asking him to tell her his secret. He first told her that he would lose his strength if he was bound with fresh bow strings. She tested him after he had fallen asleep and he broke the bow strings like a strand of yarn that had touched fire. Samson had lied to Delilah, and she cried about being deceived and mocked. He then lied to her again by telling her that new ropes would be able to restrain him. She tested him in the same manner and learned that he had lied to her a second time. Delilah was deceived yet a third time by weaving his hair into the web of a loom. Samson came dangerously close to telling his secret on that third occasion.

    “And it came to pass, when she pestered him daily with her words and pressed him, so that his soul was vexed to death, that he told her all his heart, and said to her, ‘No razor has ever come upon my head, for I have been a Nazirite to God from my mother’s womb. If I am shaven, then my strength will leave me, and I shall become weak, and be like any other man.’” (Jud. 16:16,17). Samson finally gave in to her nagging and told her the truth. It should be obvious that Samson cared for Delilah. If he didn’t, why would he have even bothered to answer her pestering? Of course, it should have been obvious to him that she tested everything he told her! Was he really so foolish to think that she wouldn’t try shaving him too? Or, had he deceived himself into thinking that he was a strong man–with or without his hair?

    Whatever he was or wasn’t thinking, Delilah lulled him to sleep and had his head shaved in Judges 16:18-20. One of the special conditions that set Samson apart had been broken and the Lord and his miraculous strength had departed.

    Samson was consequently easily captured without his miraculous strength. His eyes were put out and he was used as slave labor. He was also mocked for the Philistines’ entertainment. However, the outward sign of his strength began to come back. The Philistines were careless in not keeping him shaved bald.

    On one occasion, the Philistine leaders were gathered together to offer a sacrifice to their god, Dagon, and they had Samson brought in for entertainment purposes. No doubt they wanted to celebrate their victory over him and hurl insults and abuse at him again. However, they made a terrible mistake in putting him near the support pillars of their temple. “Then Samson called to the LORD, saying, ‘O Lord God, remember me, I pray! Strengthen me, I pray just this once, O God, that I may with one blow take vengeance on the Philistines for my two eyes!’ And Samson took hold of the two middle pillars which supported the temple, and he braced himself against them, one on his right and the other on his left. Then Samson said, ‘Let me die with the Philistines!’ And he pushed with all his might, and the temple fell on the lords and all the people who were in it. So the dead that he killed at his death were more than he had killed in his life” (Jud. 16:28-30).

    Samson had come to learn that his strength was in Jehovah. This was not a suicide but a plunging into battle for Jehovah, knowing that death would come. The Lord approved of it by granting Samson the strength to perform the task. He killed approximately 3000 men and women on that occasion, and he also destroyed the house of Dagon. As our record of Samson’s life closes, we see him being given a proper burial by his family.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on December 1, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Samson, Part 4 (JUDGES 15 & 16) 

    “Now the Philistines went up, encamped in Judah, and deployed themselves against Lehi. And the men of Judah said, ‘Why have you come up against us?’ So they answered, ‘We have come up to arrest Samson, to do to him as he has done to us.’ Then three thousand men of Judah went down to the cleft of the rock of Etam, and said to Samson, ‘Do you not know that the Philistines rule over us? What is this you have done to us?’ And he said to them, ‘As they did to me, so I have done to them’” (Jud. 15:9-11). It was a sad day in Israel on several accounts. First, God’s people were subject to the Philistines because of their sins. Second, the men of Judah did not recognize that Samson was a deliverer for them. They should have rallied around him and driven the Philistines out! But, their overall attitude was poor. They seemed satisfied being in bondage to the Philistines.

    It would be easy to think that Samson was fearful for his life because of the three thousand men of Judah who came down to arrest him. But, I believe he was actually fearful for their lives! Note carefully what Samson made them promise – “Swear to me that you will not kill me yourselves” (Jud. 15:12). Why would Samson be afraid of the Israelites trying to kill him if he was not fearful of being turned over to the Philistines bound? I believe the answer is simple. Samson was not afraid of the Israelites, but he didn’t want to end up hurting them if they attempted to kill him. Samson allowed them to arrest him and deliver him to the Philistines bound in two new ropes.

    “When he came to Lehi, the Philistines came shouting against him. Then the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him; and the ropes that were on his arms became like flax that is burned with fire, and his bonds broke loose from his hands. He found a fresh jawbone of a donkey, reached out his hand and took it, and killed a thousand men with it” (Jud. 15:14,15). With the Lord’s help, Samson piled up heaps of dead bodies on the battle field. He was invincible as long as Almighty God was with him! What a sight it would have been to see one man take on an army–with hand-to-hand combat–and win! How could this not inspire his fellow Israelites to fight alongside of him and overthrow the Philistines?

    The chapter closes with Samson acknowledging Jehovah as his strength and the true victor. He then requested water and was divinely given such. We also learn that Samson judged Israel for a span of twenty years. These events happened somewhere amidst those years.

    JUDGES 16
    Samson’s lust is apparent in this context. First, he had sexual relations with a harlot. Some of his enemies learned that he was spending the night with her, and they planned to kill him at daylight. However, he rose at midnight and left the city by pulling up the doors of a city gate and its gateposts and by carrying them some distance. Although commentators disagree on the distance, most believe it was at least several miles and up a hill. Although the size and weight of the load he was carrying is unknown today, it is obvious that the task required extreme strength that the Holy Spirit gave to Samson at that time.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on November 30, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Samson, Part 3 (JUDGES 14 & 15) 

    It was a custom in Samson’s day for the bridegroom to give a party which typically lasted for a week. Since Samson didn’t bring any friends to celebrate his marriage to the Philistine young woman, her people provided some for him–thirty in all. Samson made a wager with these men that lasted for the entire celebration week. If they could solve his riddle, he would give them thirty fine outer and inner garments. However, if they could not figure it out, they would have to give him thirty sets of clothing.

    The riddle was stated as follows: “Out of the eater came something to eat, and out of the strong came something sweet” (Jud. 14:14). They struggled mightily with the riddle for three days but then let it rest until the seventh day. On that final day, they brought pressure upon Samson’s bride by threatening her life and her family if she didn’t help them solve the riddle.

    “Then Samson’s wife wept on him, and said, ‘You only hate me! You do not love me! You have posed a riddle to the sons of my people, but you have not explained it to me.’ And he said to her, ‘Look, I have not explained it to my father or my mother; so should I explain it to you?’” (Jud. 14:16). Samson brought up a good point. He wasn’t being unkind or unloving to her by withholding the solution to the riddle. After all, he had not even shared it with his parents! His bride had wanted to know the answer all along, but after the threats were leveled against her she grows desperately persistent. She would have been much better off simply informing Samson of the threats her people had made against her.

    Samson finally explained the riddle to her and she then communicated its meaning to the sons of her people. They gave the correct solution to his riddle and he reacted strongly. “The Spirit of the LORD came upon him mightily, and he went down to Ashkelon and killed thirty of their men, took their apparel, and gave the changes of clothing to those who had explained the riddle. So his anger was aroused and he went back up to his father’s house” (Jud. 14:19). I find the order of the actions recorded here intriguing: (1) the Spirit came upon Samson, (2) he slew the Philistines, (3) then his anger was kindled, and finally, (4) he went back to his father’s house without his wife. The Lord was indeed seeking an occasion to move against the Philistines, and Samson was the man He would use for the job!

    The chapter closes with Samson’s wife being given to his best man. Samson was not aware of this.

    JUDGES 15
    After a period of time, Samson returned to his wife but was offered her younger sister instead by his father-in-law. Samson was greatly displeased and declared his innocence for his actions to follow because of this injustice. He proceeded to burn the Philistine fields by releasing 300 foxes he captured (after tying them together in pairs with a lit torch between their tails). Surprisingly, the Philistine people do not pursue Samson after learning who was responsible for the destruction of their crops and why. They recognized that his rights as a husband had been violated. They show their cruelty, however, by burning his wife and father-in-law and their home. This action provokes Samson to seek further vengeance. He attacked them with “hip and thigh, with a great slaughter” (Jud. 15:8). In other words, his attack upon them was brutal and unmerciful. But, this was just the beginning of the bloodshed.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on November 29, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Samson, Part 2 (JUDGES 13 & 14) 

    In Judges 13:6ff, Manoah’s wife informed him of the Angel’s visit and His conversation with her. Their son would be a Nazirite from the very beginning. Samson would have no choice in the matter! Manoah then prayed for the Angel to return, and his petition was answered. The Angel came again and repeated His message. It is of interest to note that Manoah’s wife was personally bound by the Nazirite conditions even while she was pregnant. The implication is crystal clear–life begins at conception! If life didn’t begin until birth, then she would not have been required to keep any aspects of the Nazirite vow for the sake of an “embryo” growing inside of her. This very context proves that abortion is wrong. Samson would be a Nazirite even before he was born. There are many other Bible passages that also teach the truth about life beginning at conception.

    The chapter closes by sharing some details pertaining to the Angel’s second visit as well as the fulfillment of the prophecy pertaining to Samson’s birth. Manoah offered to be hospitable to the Angel, but He declared that He would not eat anything. However, if Manoah desired, he could make an offering to Jehovah. Manoah wished to honor the Angel, but the Angel answered Him rather enigmatically – “Why do you ask My name, seeing it is wonderful?” (Jud. 13:18; cf. Isa. 9:6). As a side note, I believe that the Angel of Jehovah is the second Person of the Godhead (i.e., the Angel of the LORD is the same Being we know today as Jesus the Christ). It is not in the scope of this study to prove such, but we will plan to undertake this task in the future.

    As the Angel of the LORD departed, He did so in the flame of the altar. Manoah and his wife were convinced that they had seen God Himself. He feared for their lives, but she wisely pointed out – “If the LORD had desired to kill us, He would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering from our hands, nor would He have shown us all these things, nor would He have told us such things as these at this time” (Jud. 13:23).

    JUDGES 14
    The transition from chapter 13 into chapter 14 covers many years. We know nothing of Samson’s childhood. He was already grown up at this time. In fact, he was of marriageable age–and the LORD was with him.

    Samson foolishly desired a Philistine wife. His parents were against the idea, but the Lord was working in the matter. God intended to seek “an occasion to move against the Philistines” who had dominion over the Israelites at that time (14:4).

    “So Samson went down to Timnah with his father and mother, and came to the vineyards of Timnah. Now to his surprise, a young lion came roaring against him. And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and he tore the lion apart as one would have torn apart a young goat, though he had nothing in his hand. But he did not tell his father or his mother what he had done. Then he went down and talked with the woman; and she pleased Samson well” (Jud. 14:5-7). The killing of a lion with his bare hands certainly demonstrated Samson’s miraculous physical strength which was made possible via the Nazirite vow and God’s favor. The woman pleased Samson very much; he planned to marry her.

    “After some time, when he returned to get her, he turned aside to see the carcass of the lion. And behold, a swarm of bees and honey were in the carcass of the lion. He took some of it in his hands and went along, eating. When he came to his father and mother, he gave some to them, and they also ate. But he did not tell them that he had taken the honey out of the carcass of the lion” (Jud. 14:8,9). In that area, the intense heat has been known to dry up the moisture in a carcass within a day or so. Then it would lie mummified for some time. This experience would inspire the riddle Samson would soon pose.

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on November 28, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Samson, Part 1 (JUDGES 13) 

    Hebrews 11:6 teaches – “But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” There are some important things we can learn from this context about faith. First, one who has no faith is one who cannot please God. This is true no matter how morally upright a person may be. Genuine faith is not guesswork; it is not a blind leap into the dark. Faith is always based on evidence – “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (11:1). Faith is believing and trusting God (i.e., taking Him at His word). Additionally, God rewards those who diligently seek Him. Those who choose to serve Him and live obediently to His will at any cost will not go unnoticed by the Lord.

    Without question, the importance of faith is a central theme of the Scriptures. From the beginning, God has always expected man to exhibit faith. But, how can an individual demonstrate his faith? The answer: through his actions! A mere verbal acknowledgment of belief in God has never been enough. A study of James 2:14ff reveals that God desires that we prove our faith through obedience! It is still true that “faith without works is dead” (2:26).

    It is accurate to affirm that all of the great men and women of faith of the Bible had an active, obedient faith. This was true of Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Rahab, Gideon, Barak, Jephthah, David, Samuel, and many others–including Samson (cf. Heb. 11, especially verse 32).

    Admittedly, when I think of Biblical characters known for great faith in God, Samson typically doesn’t come to mind. When I think of Samson, I envision a man with great physical strength who had little self-control. I picture a man who violated his Nazirite vow, chose evil companions, fornicated, and caused an idol to receive glory that belonged to Jehovah. But, in spite of his flaws, Samson is proclaimed as a hero of faith according to Hebrews 11. We will study his life this week and examine the key events that were recorded for us by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is our desire to learn what we can from his successes and mistakes.

    We will begin by considering Judges 13-16. These four chapters are all we have recorded pertaining to the life of Samson, the thirteenth judge of Israel. Four chapters is not much in comparison with some Biblical characters, but it is quite a bit of information in contrast to what we have available on some of the other judges.

    We will not read the chapters in their entirety due to time constraints, but we will read certain verses and summarize what is happening in the text.

    JUDGES 13
    In verse 1, we see apostasy in the nation of Israel once again – “Again the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and the LORD delivered them into the hand of the Philistines for forty years.” Then, we are introduced to Manoah and his barren wife. The Angel of the Lord visited her and delivered a promise of a son. Undeniably, a family with no children is a good type to place a child in when special care is required. Three specific conditions were given by the Angel regarding the child who would be born. First, he was not to partake of strong drink. In fact, he was to abstain from the fruit of the vine period. Second, he was to avoid ingesting any unclean food. Finally, he was not to allow a razor to touch his head. The second condition was really not special in that no Israelite was to eat unclean food. However, the other two conditions were unique and included in what was called the Nazirite vow. This vow is explained in detail in Numbers 6. It seems that a special case of the Nazirite vow was in force for Samson since he was not prohibited from touching the dead. Obviously, God would not require him to fight in battle and also expect him not to go near dead bodies. Therefore, it appears as if Samson lived under a modified version of the Nazirite vow, and he was to do so for life. His life would also be special in that he would “begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines” (Jud. 13:5).

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 7:47 pm on November 26, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: green bay, home again   

    Home again 

    The Bradd clan (all 9 of us here in Clinton) went to Green Bay for our annual Thanksgiving visit. Had a great trip. I rooted for the Lions just to keep it exciting since my mom’s side of the family were all wearing green. But, it was a futile effort on my part (though the Pack did look shaky at times). Still, there is hope that the Pack will fall on Dec 25th (if not sooner)!

     
    • Stevelucas 8:51 pm on November 26, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      If only Da Bears could return to their glory years, but then again, it is on the 25th, right? Ya never know….

  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on November 25, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Shibboleth (JUDGES 12) 

    “Then the men of Ephraim gathered together, crossed over toward Zaphon, and said to Jephthah, ‘Why did you cross over to fight against the people of Ammon, and did not call us to go with you? We will burn your house down on you with fire!’ And Jephthah said to them, ‘My people and I were in a great struggle with the people of Ammon; and when I called you, you did not deliver me out of their hands. So when I saw that you would not deliver me, I took my life in my hands and crossed over against the people of Ammon; and the LORD delivered them into my hand. Why then have you come up to me this day to fight against me?’” (Judges 12:1-3).

    At first glance, one might wonder what the problem is here. Jephthah subdued a common enemy! Shouldn’t the men of Ephraim be thrilled? One would think so, but obviously a deep spirit of jealousy is at work here, as had been manifested previously (e.g., 8:1). These men of Ephraim were immature and didn’t like others to be successful. They have an attitude problem and they lash out at Jephthah for no good reason. Jephthah had invited them to help but they refused, and now they are angry at him being successful without their assistance and they want to kill him! Ridiculous!

    “Now Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead and fought against Ephraim. And the men of Gilead defeated Ephraim, because they said, ‘You Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites and among the Manassites.’ The Gileadites seized the fords of the Jordan before the Ephraimites arrived. And when any Ephraimite who escaped said, ‘Let me cross over,’ the men of Gilead would say to him, ‘Are you an Ephraimite?’ If he said, ‘No,’ then they would say to him, ‘Then say, “Shibboleth”!’ And he would say, ‘Sibboleth,’ for he could not pronounce it right. Then they would take him and kill him at the fords of the Jordan. There fell at that time forty-two thousand Ephraimites. And Jephthah judged Israel six years. Then Jephthah the Gileadite died and was buried in among the cities of Gilead” (12:4-7).

    The Ephraimites chose to fight against the men of Gilead for no good reason, and God blessed the Gileadites with victory. Over 40,000 Ephraimites died needlessly because of pride and stupidity! The Ephraimites who escaped from the battle would desire to cross the Jordan River to flee. However, the Gileadites took control of the fords and killed any Ephraimite who tried to cross. Even if an Ephraimite lied about his identity, the Gileadites would have him pronounce a word (“Shibboleth”) and his diction would betray him. In America, it is generally easy to tell from what part of the country someone has lived most recently because of his accent. So it was in Israel (e.g., Matt. 26:73). Apparently the Ephraimites had difficulty pronouncing the “sh” sound and the Gileadites knew this and used it against them for identification purposes. Jephthah was no fool; he tested those who claimed to be friends and would ascertain whether they were truly foes (cf. I John 4:1). Jephthah’s time as a deliverer (or judge) was short-lived (only six years), but he made an impact, endowing the next generation with peace.

    “After him, Ibzan of Bethlehem judged Israel. He had thirty sons. And he gave away thirty daughters in marriage, and brought in thirty daughters from elsewhere for his sons. He judged Israel seven years. Then Ibzan died and was buried at Bethlehem [this is probably Bethlehem in Zebulun, not the same place Christ was born - SRB]. After him, Elon the Zebulunite judged Israel. He judged Israel ten years. And Elon the Zebulunite died and was buried at Aijalon in the country of Zebulun. After him, Abdon the son of Hillel the Pirathonite judged Israel. He had forty sons and thirty grandsons, who rode on seventy young donkeys. He judged Israel eight years. Then Abdon the son of Hillel the Pirathonite died and was buried in Pirathon in the land of Ephraim, in the mountains of the Amalekites” (12:8-15).

    It is interesting that no significant events are recorded during the reign of these three judges. In one sense that is good, for it implies peace. However, we learn in the next chapter that the peace is short lived because Israel does not remain faithful to the LORD! It doesn’t take long for a nation to corrupt itself and leave behind the way of righteousness! Also, we have a record here of more extremely large families with dozens of children. Such was made possible by one man marrying a multiplicity of women. Polygamy, though not a part of God’s ideal will for marriage, was widely practiced throughout the nation’s history and caused many problems, as the Scriptures illustrate elsewhere (e.g., II Sam. 13ff; I Kings 11). The people seemed to live in peace and prosperity during this time, but it will not last because of their sins!

     
  • Stephen R. Bradd 5:00 am on November 24, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Jephthah’s Vow, Part 2 (JUDGES 11) 

    In our prior lesson, we read the entire context of both the uttering and implementation of Jephthah’s vow (cf. Jud. 11:29-40). Although some believe this judge offered his daughter as a human sacrifice, I do not believe that to be the case for the following seven reasons:

    It is unlikely that the thought of offering a person as a burnt offering crossed his mind. Human sacrifice was always understood, from the days of Abraham, to be an offense and an abomination to God, being expressly denounced and forbidden (cf. Lev. 18:21; 20:2-5; Deut. 12:31; 18:10). There is no evidence that any Israelite ever offered human sacrifice prior to the days of Ahaz (734 B.C.). It is inconceivable that a man like Jephthah, who was God-fearing and knowledgeable of the law, could have supposed that he would have been pleasing the LORD by perpetrating such a crime.

    Although some might call his vow foolish, it does not appear to be impulsive. His vow is not made in the midst of the confusion of battle where we might expect him to speak without fully weighing his words. No, his vow is made before he sets out to fight the Ammonites.

    In 11:37, his daughter requests two months to bewail her virginity. This is significant. Note that she is not going to bewail her approaching loss of life. If she was going to die, why would she care about the fact that she was a virgin? However, if she is not going to be offered as a burnt offering but instead devoted to the LORD for His divine service, then it makes sense for her to bewail her virginity. Evidently she understands that under such circumstances she will not have the right to marry, and thus she will always remain a virgin.

    11:39 states that “she knew no man.” This fact is mentioned after Jephthah had already carried out the vow. This would be a very pointless remark if she had been put to death. But, it has perfect relevance if she was devoted to the service of God at the door of the tabernacle for the rest of her life (cf. Exo. 38:8; I Sam. 22:2; Luke 2:36,37).

    It is extremely unlikely that any priest in that day and time would be so corrupt as to assist Jephthah in offering a human as a burnt sacrifice. A priest would need to be involved since all burnt offerings made to the LORD had to be offered at the tabernacle by a priest.

    The Bible does not explicitly say that he gave his daughter as a burnt sacrifice. It simply states that Jephthah did with her according to his vow. How one interprets that vow determines whether or not one is forced into concluding that Jephthah offered his daughter as a literal burnt offering. If one interprets Jephthah’s words in a spiritual or symbolic sense, then the difficulty vanishes. That is, perhaps Jephthah fulfilled his vow through the fact that his daughter knew no man and that her life was dedicated to God, as a “spiritual burnt offering,” not a literal one.

    Jephthah is listed among the faithful in Hebrews 11:32. Admittedly, that doesn’t prove that he did not do something heinous here and seek forgiveness later, but the position I’m arguing for here (i.e., a spiritual fulfillment of the vow) is consistent with Jephthah being named among great heroes of faith.

    Regardless of whether Jephthah offered his daughter as a literal or symbolic burnt offering, we must admire the great faith of his daughter. She encouraged him to keep his word to God, even at great expense to herself! What an example of submission and faithful obedience she manifested! She was not forgotten by her contemporaries and we should not forget a young woman of this caliber either!

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,603 other followers